Thursday, February 21, 2013

Mere hours after he advised women to unleash both barrels of a 12-gague uselessly into the air, Shiftless Joe Biden emerged from the woodshed to toe Barry's anti-gun line. The Washington Post called this idiocy a "point by point rebuttal" to the National Rifle Association's arguments that the Second Amendment means what it says: That "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed":

Vowing that there is
“a moral price to be paid for inaction,” Biden sought to publicly shame
lawmakers who are hesitant about voting for President Obama’s gun-control agenda.
“I can’t imagine how we will be judged as a society if we do
nothing,” he said. “If you’re concerned about your political survival,
you should be concerned about the survival of our children. And guess
what? I believe the price to be paid politically should go to those who
refuse to act.
. . .
The American people are with us.”
Biden, his voice growing louder and louder, delivered a point-by-point rebuttal of arguments made by the National Rifle Association
and other gun-rights activists. He argued that people do not need
AR-15s and other military-style assault rifles for self protection.
“They
say, ‘Well, it’s about our culture,’ ” Biden said. “The facts are, our
culture’s not killing 25 people a day. It’s weapons and high-capacity
magazines. It’s criminals who get guns without going through a
background check.”
Biden accused some questioners participating in
his online chats of planting questions designed to place roadblocks to
his gun-control agenda.
“They say, ‘All you’re going to do, Biden,
you and the president, you’re going to deny law-abiding citizens their
rights under the Second Amendment,’ ” Biden said. “Not true.

An actual point by point rebuttal to this nonsense isn't difficult to muster.

First of all, trying to "publicly shame" lawmakers with a moral compass who are on the right side of this issue is going to be difficult.Better than 10,000 Americans are killed each and every year by drunk drivers. Do we ban cars for law-abiding drivers because of this carnage? Then why does Bozo Biden insist that there is "a moral price to be paid" for not depriving law abiding citizens of their right to keep and bear arms?

If Biden were truly "concerned for the survival of our children" he would be campaigning to replace every motorized vehicle on the road with pedal cars that achieve a top speed of five miles an hour because a hell of a lot more kids are killed at the hands of drunk drivers than at the hands of crazed psychos with guns. And can we once and for all dispense with this idiocy that criminals and psychos will obtain their guns legally by going through background checks? Just how stupid do you think we are Bozo Joe?

Biden is right on one point: Our culture is NOT killing 25 people a day ( obviously one of those "statistics" Joe pulled out of his ass). This is an argument for the Second Amendment Joe, you moron. But weapons and high capacity magazines aren't killing people anymore than a Ford Explorer kills people. It takes psychos with weapons (not necessarily guns) and drunk drivers behind the wheel to kill people with guns and cars.

As far as denying "law abiding citizens their rights under the Second Amendment" who the hell are you, Moron Joe, to tell a law-abiding citizen that they "do not need an AR-15". By the way, for you ObamaBot Zombies out there, you can read up on what an AR-15 actually is right here. Or better yet, I'll just explain it to you in simple terms: An AR-15 is essentially a scary-looking .22 caliber semi-automatic rifle. It isn't difficult to use, as Shiftless Joe would have you believe, and is commonly used for target practice and hunting. Read more!

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

“If you want to protect yourself, get a double barrel shotgun, have the
shells of a 12-gauge shotgun … and fire two blasts outside the house. I
promise you … You don’t need an AR-15. It’s harder to aim. It’s harder
to use, and in fact, you don’t need 30 rounds to protect yourself. Buy a
shotgun, buy a shotgun,

Now I'm not necessarily against having a shotgun in the house for protection but has the liberal's vice president not figured out by now that he is the court jester in a regime that wants to totally compromise, if not completely eviscerate the Second Amendment? Barry is probably none too appreciative of the fact that as his homeland security department is recommending such ridiculous self-defense techniques as attacking a shooter with a pair or scissors or peeing or barfing on your rapist-to-be, his buffoonish VP is making the case us Second Amendment defenders have been making all along: There's nothing like arming yourself with a big gun to equalize the situation if you happen to be faced with a break-in or assault.

The other point that needs to be made here is this: Who in the hell is the stupidest vice president in modern history to be telling me what gun I need to defend myself? The Second Amendment doesn't read "the right of the people to bear whatever arms the stupidest vice president in modern history shall deem necessary shall not be infringed". And why should my Second Amendment rights have to conform to this idiot's notion of how many rounds I need in my clip (or the idiot governor of New York for you New Yorker's)? I bet this woman in Georgia who fended off an intruder that hunted her and her nine-year-old twins down in a crawlspace in the top floor of their house thinks she could've used a few more than the five bullets it took her to wound her attacker.Suppose there were two intruders and she just spent all the bullets moron Joe thought she needed on one? Every situation is different and who the hell is some idiot liberal to tell me how many bullets I need?

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Will someone tell this dumb ass that he can stop campaigning? He's a lame duck, he doesn't have to campaign any more.Yes, I'm talking about the liberal's president of the United States. But apparently Barry figures that campaigning beats the hell out of actually governing because he doesn't do a hell of a lot of governing.

Why doesn't he govern? Because he doesn't know how to. He's a "community organizer" whatever the hell that is and that's all he's ever known (other than being a malcontent teenage druggie punk). And a community organizer's job is to is to whip up anti-establishment sentiment in a quest for "change", never mind that Barry is the establishment and has been for the last four years. He pretends like he isn't and reinforces that notion by spending his time, golfing with Tiger Woods vacationing by himself, and playing pick-up basketball with Jay Z.

Which brings us to the looming sequester -- automatic spending cuts that were his idea -- and the campaign stops Barry made (flanked by first responders as props) today to warn about how dangerous these cuts, which were his idea and agreed to by a bunch of panty waist Republican lawmakers, will be to damn near everything liberals hold near and dear:

This so-called sequester “won’t help the economy,” Obama said. “It won’t create jobs.”
The “meat cleaver approach” will lead to such things as the layoffs
of teachers, cutbacks in the air traffic control system, furloughs of
FBI agents and a compromised military, Obama said as he again called for
heading off sequestration with a “balanced” debt reduction plan — and
laid the groundwork for blaming the Republicans if the automatic cuts
come to pass.
“These cuts are not smart, these cuts are not fair,” Obama said. “People will lose their jobs.”
A balanced plan means both spending cuts as well as new tax revenue
to be derived from closing loopholes and deductions that benefit the
wealthy, Obama said.

Wow, all this from $85 billion in cuts in a four thousand billion dollar budget. Rather than slash all these programs Barry, we could just cut food stamp card benefits to all those folks I see in line ahead of me at the grocery store who are buying $400 worth of groceries on my dime, including every name brand food you can imagine.

Let the sequester happen. We need to call the bluff of the punk community organizer who holds the highest elective office in the land.

Monday, February 18, 2013

I didn't watch the liberal's president and his State of the Union address -- the stupidity was just too much for me to take. But you can't escape the the stupidity as reported by the media. One of the more stupid of the stupid utterances that passed the lips of America's very own Hugo Chavez was this:

“In the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand
birthdays, graduation, anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a
bullet from a gun.”

No Barry, let's try this one more time: "In the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand
birthdays, graduation, anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by" psycho bastards from hell who need to be punished for their crimes (or do us all a favor when they blow themselves away).
Bullets don't kill people, Barry: People kill people. Psychos and criminals don't care whether a gun is illegal or a bullet is illegal -- hell they don't even care if they have a gun or bullet. They'll kill with a bat or a hammer or anything else they can get their hands on.
And while we're on the subject of Barry's magic bullets, why is Janet Napolitano's Homeland Security Department buying up every bullet they can get their hands on?

Well, well isn't this a surprise: Insuring people that aren't insurable is an expensive, money losing proposition! Which is why, the Obamacare stop-gap program designed to cover the medical bills of 400,000 Americans with preexisting conditions is closing down because it ran out of money after covering only 135,000 of the 400,000:

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Citing financial concerns, the Obama
administration Friday began quietly winding down one of the earliest
programs created by the President’s health care overhaul, a plan that
helps people with medical problems who can’t get private insurance.

In an afternoon teleconference with state counterparts,
administration officials said the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan
will stop taking new applications. People already in the plan will not
lose coverage.

Designed as a stopgap solution until the law’s full
consumer protections are in effect next year, PCIP is currently serving
more than 100,000 people, a lifeline for patients with serious medical
problems such as cancer and heart failure. However, Congress allocated a
limited amount of money, and the administration’s technical experts
want to make sure it doesn’t run out.

“We’re glad this program was here and able to help,” said
Amie Goldman, who oversees the program in Wisconsin. “I’m certainly
disappointed we won’t be able to serve everyone who has a need for this
coverage.”

The plan covers people who have had problems getting
private insurance because of a medical condition and have been uninsured
for at least six months. Premiums are keyed to average rates charged in
each state, which means they’re not necessarily cheap, often amounting
to several hundred dollars a month for middle-aged individuals.

It's a sad fact of life that when you have existing medical problems, it is often difficult, if not impossible, to get health insurance coverage. However, the law as it existed BEFORE Obamacare was a better compromise that what we have now. Under current law, an insurance company can't refuse to cover you as long as you don't have a lapse in coverage. Which means if you have a preexisting condition, you have to do what you can to make sure your coverage doesn't lapse. Granted, sometimes this doesn't work, but covering people who have preexisting conditions is a difficult challenge as the Obamacare Wizards are finding out (and the 265,000 people with preexisting conditions who were promised coverage under Obamacare but aren't getting it are finding out as well). Of course, a substantial majority of those with preexisting conditions don't HAVE to live with them. Many preexisting conditions -- diabetes, heart disease, some cancers, etc. can be traced back to poor lifestyle choices: If you take care of yourself better, you most likely won't have to deal with some of these afflictions, which would come in handy for the healthy among us because we are going to need plenty more healthy people to help pay for Obamacare's ultimate solution for taking care of those with preexisting conditions:

Starting January 1, 2014, insurance companies will no longer be able to
turn anyone away because of poor health. At the same time, the federal
government will begin subsidizing coverage for millions of individuals
who have no access to employer plans. That means many of the people
currently in the PCIP program may end up with lower premiums once the
government’s financial help is factored in.

Let me break this down into the simplest terms for those of you who have proven that you are a little slow on the uptake -- by that I mean you Obama voters: Healthy and young Americans need to stay that way and earn lots of money in the meantime because your health insurance premiums are going to be jacked up to pay for the health care of the unhealthy -- that's the "insurance companies will no longer be able to turn anyone away because of poor health" part. And "the federal government will begin subsidizing" is the part where your taxes are going up to pay for the unhealthy as well. So in other words healthy tax payers, bend over twice.

There is no such thing as a free lunch as the Obamacare Wizards are finding out. Granting health insurance to every American with a preexisting condition is a wonderful altruistic aim. But the details are a bitch for the rest of us.

Sunday, February 17, 2013

"Liberal idiot of the week" is kind of like saying "sun rising in the East" -- the fact that liberalism is rampant idiocy is like the fact that di-hydrogen monoxide is water (see Penn and Teller's YouTube video about the petition to ban water). But as liberal idiots go, the liberal idiots described in this segment go above and beyond the call of duty in liberal idiocy for the week. And here we go:

1. Barack Obama: The supreme liberal idiot in chief apparently thinks that raising the minimum wage to $9 an hour will magically raise millions and millions of Americans out of poverty:

"Tonight, let’s declare that in the wealthiest nation on Earth, no one
who works full-time should have to live in poverty, and raise the
federal minimum wage to $9.00 an hour. This single step would raise the
incomes of millions of working families. It could mean the difference
between groceries or the food bank; rent or eviction; scraping by or
finally getting ahead.

"Millions of working families", Barry? Let's get real dude! The Bureau of Labor Statistics tells the story: Minimum wage workers tend to be young, single and/or uneducated and working part time -- not "millions of working families". 99.999% of the 4.4 million minimum wage workers ain't trying to support families. And while we're on the subject of "working families" am I the only mid-level management person working his butt off that resents the implication that because most of my work product is management, administrative and intellectual and done at a desk that it is somehow less "work" than other types of work?.The fact that the number one administrator in the federal government seldom gets up before 9AM, spends copious amounts of time golfing and vacationing and couldn't be bothered enough by the fact that people were dying at our embassy in Libya to stay up and monitor the events might lead him to believe that other managers and administrators don't work either. But we do.

2. The second liberal idiot of the week is Iowa's own Tom Harkin, who has fortunately tendered his resignation as our commie pig bastard from hell junior senator with damn near 40 years in Washington. Harkin came up with this little gem this week:

"Everyone keeps saying we have a spending problem. And when they talk
about that, it’s like there’s an assumption that somehow we as a nation
are broke. We can't afford these things any longer. We’re too broke to
invest in education and housing and things like that. Well look at it
this way, we’re the richest nation in the history of the world. We are
now the richest nation in the world. We have the highest per capita
income of any major nation. That kind of begs the question, doesn’t it? If we’re so rich, why are we so broke? Is it a spending problem? No."

Tell me folks: If you made $54,000 a year but spent $100,000 every year, year after year, and put that extra $46,000 a year on a credit card or borrowed it from your neighbor who doesn't really like you, would you say that you have a spending problem? I thought so. So is Harkin drunk, on drugs, senile or just stupid? I think it's the latter.

Even some of the biggest lefties in the commentary business couldn't stomach Hill's asinine comments. This faux-intellectual young punk has deserved to be marginalized for his many other radical leftist opinions and perhaps this idiocy will be enough to do in his career for good. He's entitled to his opinion, of course, but he's not entitled to be taken seriously while holding such an asinine, obnoxious and downright dangerous opinion.

Stay tuned for next weeks installment of Liberal Idiots of the Week. Finding examples of liberal idiocy isn't hard. Choosing the most idiotic of the idiocy is. I'll do my best to make those tough calls. So much liberal idiocy, so little time.